|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Idea #20439: "Live CD Size as an end" is harming ubuntu's image
|
Written by vexorian the 27 Jun 09 at 13:48.
Category: Installation.
Related project:
Nothing/Others.
Status: New
|
|
|
Rationale
Take a look at:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/Meeting/2009-06-09#The%20GIMP
It is not the first time that a completely ridiculous, non-sense, anti-usability and "coincidentally" pro-Mono proposal (also coincidentally this time, from a former Microsoft employee) is pushed under the excuse of live cd size.
Apparently live CD size has become such an end instead of a means that ubuntu even considered removing the whole image editing thing to replace it with a sub-par photo management thingy. (No, apparently creation of images is too complicated for ubuntu users, they only want to edit a couple of pictures, let creativity be part of the windows or mac OS/X experience). This time, we dashed the bullet, but the conclussion is way too weak:
"If we still need the room, kick it out altogether"
This is not the first time, before we had another sign, canonical seriously considering replacing Rhythmbox (second most popular Linux music player, correctly working, good features, good amount of ubuntu users that like it) with Banshee (a feature lacking, mono-driven, unstable app only liked by Mono zealots) again under the extremely lame excuse of live CD size.
This situation is getting ridiculous.
Some points:
* The current default app distribution just works. Jaunty had tons of good reviews. In no place were there complains about X esoteric program missing.
* The current default app distribution already fits a CD. In other words, CD size is a problem only if you want to add new packages. What new packages? Is it really wise to replace raw functionality with some incredibly unknown package named "couchdb" that, I as an ubuntu user have never needed ?
* A great selling point for ubuntu, used in the ubuntu.com site itself is that it comes with a fully working app suite. Not that it comes with Mono, or that it comes with "couchdb" whatever that is. Just stopping to think of removing image editing from the suite is completely stupid. I am sorry for the language, but that's just what it looks like.
* Removing documentation just to support some esoteric package is just as wrong.
* Following this trend, we might end with a live CD that only brings a few useless Mono apps, some MBs of packages no one knows what they do. And users will need to spend ages downloading Open office, firefox, the gimp, gedit and other apps that "use too much space" and are not Mono-based.
* If size is that important, there are much more effective ways to save space, one is to replace the current Mono apps in the default with the non-Mono alternatives (as there are many already)
* An even easier way to solve this problem, is ... not to create the problem. Something is telling me we really didn't need these new packages like "couchdb" and that if there is something that we could allow the user to have to download it would be that...
* Another easy way is to just provide one language in the CD and let user pick the language before download! We already need to download language packs which is very annoying.
So seriously, live CD size is not an end, it is a means, and one that is in my opinion much less important than providing a good app selection and a working OS. Just seeing that this non-sense keeps happening is greatly harming ubuntu's image. Some of us are getting convinced Linux needs a new flagship distro. Fedora is looking good as they are really making sense of what a good default is (For starters one that brings native apps that can do stuff).
Tags:
(none)
|
|
Propose your solution
Attachments
No attachments.
Duplicates
Comments
|
vexorian
wrote on the 27 Jun 09 at 14:00
|
|
|
Anyway, knowing the brainstorm mods, they will manage to pattern match the rational or just a single solution and end up marking the whole deal as a duplicate. I hope at least someone reads it.
|
|
|
I agree, the 'cd' image is hurting ubuntu more than anything else, and the desktop experience in ubuntu is suffering compared to that of windows and mac because of ubuntu's tiresome dedication to the 'cd' image.
Make dvd the standard and offer the cd for those who don't want to or cant download the dvd. Or for those bandwidthly challenged, they can purchase the disc or use shipit.
Using a dvd image means aside from other things ubuntu could ship with a better desktop experience for the users to bring it up to the desktop standard of mac or windows 7.
|
|
|
"Debian's decision to include Mono in the default installation, for the sake of Tomboy which is an application written in C#, leads the community in a risky direction. It is dangerous to depend on C#, so we need to discourage its use."
It was Richard M. Stallman who said that!
Before you vote, READ the full article on the Free Software Foundation website:
http://www.fsf.org/news/dont-depend-on-mono
Yet another vote for complete removal of moNO apps from default Ubuntu installation.
MoNO stuff takes to much place on CD is slow, heavy for system resources (high RAM and CPU usage) and M$-dependent, so remove it, please, from default Ubuntu installation. Let a user choose by oneself if wants to install it or not.
Don't force to use this apps like openSuse, be more creative!
Some moNO supporters claim that there is no alternative for moNo based applications. It's not true:
1) Tomboy - Gnote, Lucruri;
2) FSpot - gThumb, digiKam (version 1.0 beta based on qt4 is available for testing in PPA);
3) Banshee - Listen!, Exaile
Listen stable PPA:
deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/listen-devel/ppa/ubuntu jaunty main
So drop moNO as far as it doesn't destroy whole GNOME desktop environment! Get rid of this M$ trojan horse in Free Software world.
Post your comment
|
|
vektor
wrote on the 29 Jun 09 at 13:59
|
|
|
|
AndrewLuecke> Total agreement here. To me it sounds like RMS has discovered Brainstorm...
|
|
|
My biggest fear with using DVD's is that the images will no longer fit on a USB driver smaller than 8GB. since USB drives come in power of 2's sizes (1, 2, 4, 8, 16, etc) and 4GB drive won't even be enough, where-as now you can even use a 1GB (which I use).
1GB flash drive = $5
8GB flash drive = $40
This is a much bigger issue for people that don't have DVD drives, or any drive for that matter (netbooks).
|
|
tenplus1
wrote on the 29 Jun 09 at 21:25
|
|
|
CD's are mainly there so that Ubuntu can be installed on the older systems that people still use, but it would be great if Ubuntu could be purchased from the online Canonical store on USB Flash Drives also :)
Also, Mono is huge, only Tomboy and F-spot use it (for now on the CD) and can be easily replaced with Gnote and Gthumb which I actually use instead anyway...
Keep GIMP... dammit!
|
|
korin43
wrote on the 30 Jun 09 at 05:08
|
|
|
Why all the mono hate?
Having Ubuntu come on a CD is extremely important. I know most people you know have DVD drives, but there's a difference between "most people you know" and "most people".
|
|
|
I voted down the idea to switch to DVD format.
It is true that Windows and MacOS are on DVD by now, but they do not release a new version 2 times a year;
server bandwidth costs, very much, and rising the image size will rise the costs.
There is a lot of people who still use HTTP and FTP to downloading instead of torrent.
( For example at my work place torrent protocol are filtered so I can only use FTP to download Ubuntu )
To me is not a problem to remove mono from the live CD, but I like to say that interop with other OS is a feature, not an issue.
|
|
toxwa
wrote on the 30 Jun 09 at 09:46
|
|
|
I would prefer a standard DVD image, and then a basic CD image for people with limited bandwidth or no DVD drive.
But I would like it if there was an option to order a ship-it DVD of a 64 bit version (I had to download 9.04 because ordering a 64bit version was impossible). Seeing how they can now fit ubuntu on 1 CD, the DVD could have both the 32 and 64 bit versions (although for downloading it might be best to have a split option for bandwidth reasons)
As for mono, I don't really see the problem. I rarely use f-spot, but I do use tomboy. Maybe I should try Gnote. But then I would probably have to download mono when I want to install some other program. It's just useful to have it installed already.
|
|
|
VangelistX, keep the FUD out of brainstorm, will you please?
I dislike MS as much as anyone, but there is no reason for excluding good programs simply because they were written in C#. (Listen to the Linux Action Show, s10ep07, they make some good points)
And yes, keep GIMP, F-spot a totally different app.
|
|
|
@AndrewLuecke
I completely agree with you, it should came with a bunch of sw, but on the other hand ubuntu, xubuntu, kubuntu and edubuntu are different os, so you can't just get them on a live dvd
|
andruk
(Idea reviewer)
wrote on the 3 Jul 09 at 20:07
|
|
|
I see people posting their opinions on Mono, but I don't see people directly refuting anything (although links do help - thank you to those who have posted those).
I'm worried about patents that Microsoft has on the implementation of C#. I would rather not try to laboriously copy everything that they do just to be sued by Microsoft for patent infringement, and it gives Microsoft more PR ammunition because they can claim that FOSS are a bunch of communistic coders that are helping the terrorists win. I'd rather not give them the chance to use that obviously idiotic argument.
Furthermore, if Microsoft did in fact win a patent case, Linux distributions would start having to pay Microsoft licensing fees to distribute their distribution, or at least they would if they wanted to ship Mono by default before Mono worked around the infringed patents (which, if it's even possible, would take awhile.
From what I've gathered, in the end, using and including Mono by default is a gamble against Microsoft playing nice and fighting fair - which they have *never done* in the past - remember the browser wars? Remember the DOJ trial? Remember DR-DOS? Remember OS/2? Remember OEM licensing agreements? Remember how Linux is still not a viable desktop OS because applications are written to an entrenched monopoly?
I would rather not gamble against the niceness of a corporation that has fought tooth and nail to the point of acting *outside of the law* to make sure that they are the only OS that consumers want, it just seems silly and unnecessary to me. Take Mono off of the LiveCD and let users install it like they install multimedia codecs, that way Canonical and downstream distributions can't be sued out of existence.
|
|
bryonak
wrote on the 4 Jul 09 at 18:45
|
|
|
"But what good is taking away a few boxes of ammunition from microsoft, if they still have a whole truckfull remaining?"
What truckful would that be? There are the (obviously FUD) claims against the kernel... yet a wheelbarrow is completely sufficient to hold all the boxes of patent ammunition Microsoft has against Ubuntu ;)
And most of these boxes are potentially filled with Mono.
It's not harmful at the moment, but there is a substantial risk... RedHat is steering clear of it for a good reason.
|
|
|
Just working on some boilerplate in response to the common patent argument going around.
There are Microsoft programs (such as the Open Specification Promise) that reduce the risk from Microsoft patents so low as to be negligible. (They will not sue anyone anywhere over related patents unless sued first for technologies on the list.)
Anyone who *ever* says anything like "well, if you say mono isn't safe because of Microsoft patents, then you have to say the same thing about FTP/Ping/SOAP/etc." is *wrong*. They are either being dishonest or too ignorant to say anything of value on the matter.
This is a false dilemma: if you give up one thing, you must give up everything.
So we see it is indeed possible for a situation to exist where there is so low a risk that reasonable parties are willing to accept it.
It is true that you can not be 100% safe. Reasonable people understand that. But just because you can not be 100% safe, does not mean you accept 0% safe. It means you strive to reach the level of safety you think acceptable.
|
|
|
Andrew,
Maybe I have not clearly explained the Open Specification Promise?
Microsoft's Open Specification Promise applies to the entire *technology*, including future versions.
Microsoft is not saying we will not sue for these *patents*, they are saying we will not sure for these *technologies* - it could be 1 patent, or it could be 100.
Under that sort of promise, Microsoft can unquestionably make the mono project safe from any patent threat from Microsoft.
In fact, because Microsoft has such an option - *but* has not applied it to mono / moonlight - it raises some questions to some people. (This is a much longer discussion.)
|
|
|
Fair enough.
To be honest this is not really a good idea to discuss the CD size specifically, because it is all twisted up with mono junk now, but as far as the core idea goes:
I'm not sure how much of a cost increase it would be in terms of distribution - manufacturing and download costs would go up, but I can't say how much. DVDs cost a little more than CDs, and many users worldwide have to pay for bandwidth.
For me personally, I wouldn't mind DVDs, because I would like to see the 'buntus unified more and a DVD would be a nice way to do that.
I'm sure *one day* it will be fine to switch, I'm just not sure we've reached that day yet.
|
|
bryonak
wrote on the 5 Jul 09 at 17:37
|
|
|
Despite the possibility of beating a dead horse, I'd like to elaborate a bit more on my "wheelbarrow" analogy ;)
Sure Microsoft has a lot of patents, but the danger of these is that "maybe somewhere something might under some circumstances" be in violation.
The only "palpable" (or better say announced?) attack vector against Ubuntu have been the kernel violation claims, which I simply don't believe in.
This leaves Mono...
Little to nothing has been done to ensure our (non-Suse users) protection... politically that is.
Canonical is still a tiny company, and there is little "risk" for Microsoft when suing them.
IBM or Oracle won't suddenly jump to the rescue, and RedHat is probably too small... the only defence is not giving Microsoft a reason to sue.
Now one can debate the risk and whether Mono is a reason or will become a reason once it's more important for the system (-> bigger damage if it has to be removed).
Still there is clear rejection from big parts of the community (I don't mean the clowns at BN.com) and RedHat's actions are a strong indicator as well.
|
|
bryonak
wrote on the 7 Jul 09 at 13:44
|
|
|
Lawsuits against Mono are still very much part of the discussion, because it's not clear how much of Mono is protected by this announcement.
Only the basic definitons of .NET are covered, which would be no problem if Mono was ECMA but completely original otherwise (in functionality and all that stuff you can patent).
Yet actually it reimplements lots of things that are not within this "promise"... and it will probably continue to reimplement more and more patented things in the future, in order to catch up with .NET.
Based on past experience, this announcement could very well be a publicity stunt trying to take the wind out of people's sails.
Besides, rejection doesn't only come from the legal aspect, but also from the fact that we don't take wine and Windows .exes into the default install either (like we do with Mono and "Windows" .exes). For example, we don't replace Transmission with µTorrent.
Personally, the more I read about Mono, the clearer it becomes that we should leave it in the repositories (like wine) but take it out of the default install...
About the Ubuntu install size:
We will move to DVDs sooner or later, the only question is the sweet time spot.
Maybe Canonical should try to evaluate the bandwidth of their users, especially in the third world.
By the way, since when is Eclipse in the default Ubuntu install?
|
|
bryonak
wrote on the 7 Jul 09 at 16:50
|
|
|
Where have you read that all of Mono is going to be safe from patents?
That would be extremely welcome yet outrageous news... could you please provide a link?
It seems to me that you want to push a serious issue under the carpet quickly, repeatedly stating that everything is solved...
Besides I do try to skip reading those discussions that I feel are not by involved/well informed people ;)
|
|
bryonak
wrote on the 7 Jul 09 at 16:54
|
|
|
|
Offtopic: I'm not aware of a game bigger than 50MB in the default install either :P
|
|
|
I think it's funny how the *exact* response I laid out was precisely what has finally happened; mono supporters are screaming in joy about how now mono is safe; yet I have been the one called "ignorant", a "zealot", "the reason linux is failing", blah blah blah. Of course, no one has ever bothered to suggest I might have had the smallest of points.
Anyway, moving forward: so long as the application DOES NOT use non-ECMA standard parts of .NET, I will no longer be objecting to mono on its face.
I do not believe that under the Community Promise there is enough of a danger of an attack to reject applications covered under the promise.
|
|
bryonak
wrote on the 8 Jul 09 at 07:05
|
|
|
@AndrewLuecke: Ah well, but that's nothing new (to me at least... RSS and Specto help ;) ). I commented on that before you answered in this and the other 'thread' about Rhythmbox.
Again, a limited/crippled framework is no fun to work with...
There are still valid reasons to remove Mono from the default install, they simply aren't so evidently compelling. Please don't try to cut off discussion where it's obviously needed.
To elaborate a bit... I think we cab agree that applications will sooner or later start using more of the unprotected parts. They are what makes .NET so good.
Users will have them downloaded and installed as a dependency. What exactly is the difference from two days ago then?
We also don't base our default install on superior Windows software via wine... I know that Transmission is coming along nicely, but users vote for µTorrent with their downloads.
And those who used both will agree that Pidgin still isn't a patch on Miranda (let's see how Empathy turns out).
Why do we do this with Mono then?
Or performance/resource demand... and please don't compare a C variant with scripting languages like Python ;)
@ushimitsudoki: to me it seems that there are way more fanatic pro-Mono zealots than anti.
But maybe that's because I don't read sites such as digg or boycottnovell, so I don't see the others...
On the CD size:
We do not include Java in the default install because it's not crucial. Which is what the CD is for: get the most bang for the least size. There are still a lot of people on slow connections for whom downloading for 12h (CD) or 70h (DVD) is a huge difference.
We could go for a size in between (1.x GB) and let people burn it on DVD... a cost/efficiency analysis would be useful.
No, USB sticks are not an option for worldwide distribution.
The same goes for developer tools: those with connections big enough will have no issue installing them via apt.
If I want a specific library with my application, nothing hinders me from marking it as a dependency so people will download it automatically when downloading my app.
The first thing I install on almost any machine are basic tools like build-essential, xxdiff/meld and geany, which any developer or experienced user can do easily.
I don't see a reason why these packages or additional libraries should be default for Ubuntu's target group, unlike, say, a video player or photo editor (GIMP).
An important part of the decision would be to find out what percentage of people have slow connections.
We shouldn't base this decision on what is possible to pack in / what applications we have, but on what users need and how much they have to wait to get it.
|
|
biomega
wrote on the 9 Jul 09 at 21:30
|
|
|
|
This entrance is a fanatic entrance against Mono... Banshee indeed has more features that Rhythmbox just for telling one thing... Mono should NOT be eliminated just 'cause came from Microsoft's .NET
|
|
|
|
I like Banshee. It's fancy and I've never had any stability problems with it. It takes a little longer to load up, but the total time is only 2 - 3 seconds on this laptop. So who cares. the difference is barely noticeable.
|
|
kev717
wrote on the 19 Jul 09 at 14:41
|
|
|
I think Mono would be better if removed, whenever I try to run Ubuntu on an older machine with MONO the machine just becomes unresponsive (that's after installing to hard drive)... but if I remove MONO it works much better and the apps that are "mono-replacements" work much better. Sure, removing MONO would only free up 30MB, however that is at least something and is better than keeping the 30MB on there.
Has anybody ever seen how people shave seconds off of the startup time, and eventually get it down to 20 seconds? Try one thing (such as removing something useless or changing the boot process or modifying some configuration files), and you may only get a quarter of a second faster, but that is at least something and eventually it will add up to something very significant.
Therefore, remove MONO and the applications that depend on it, though it may seem pointless, it can really add up.
(This coming from somebody with only 4GB of Hard drive space)
|
|
|
|
Re idea 7: "Older" PCs don't boot from USB. We'd still need the kernel and initrd to boot somehow (GRUB4DOS on HD?)
|
Post your comment
|
|
|
